header-logo header-logo

31 January 2013
Issue: 7546 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The privilege card

Legal professional privilege is for lawyers only

Legal professional privilege (LPP) applies only to qualified solicitors and barristers, the Supreme Court has held.

In a majority 5:2 verdict, the court ruled that the scope of LLP did not extend to accountants offering legal advice on a tax matter, in Prudential plc and Prudential (Gibraltar) Ltd v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Philip Pandolfo (HM Inspector of Taxes) [2013] UKSC 1.

Prudential had argued that accountants advising on a tax avoidance scheme could not be compelled to disclose their communications because they were bound by LLP and therefore owed absolute confidentiality to their client.

However, the court agreed with the Court of Appeal’s view that extending LPP to other professionals was a matter for Parliament not the courts.

James Bullock, head of litigation and compliance at Pinsent Masons, says: “LPP is a rule of evidence designed to protect individuals against disclosure to the court.

“It is therefore about the rights of litigants—not, as some have sought to portray it, about professionals lining their pockets.

“There are many interested parties...it is also an issue for other professionals who provide advice on ‘the law’—for instance, surveyors and planning consultants.”

Desmond Hudson, chief executive of the Law Society, which intervened in the case, says: “The relationship between a solicitor or barrister and his or her client is a precious human right, tested and refined by centuries of common law.

“Legal professional privilege supports the process of law, speeding the conviction of the guilty and securing the acquittal of the innocent.”

Lord Neuberger’s summing up of the decision and reasons is the first to be posted on the Supreme Court’s new YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/uksupremecourt.

Issue: 7546 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll